Impact of Blended Approach on Second Year Home Economics Students’ Biology Practical Achievement in Two Districts of Oti Region, Ghana

Author(s): S. Klu, Y. Ameyaw, W. K. Hordzi

The study determines the impact of Blended Approach as a pedagogical tool in teaching Second Year Home Economics students in three schools obtained from two districts within Oti Region. The selection of the three schools was based on the fact that the schools had at least two Home Economics Second Year classes and as well showed poor performance in biology practicals during the diagnostic stage of the study. In all, 164 Second Year Home Economics students representing six intact classes with three experimental groups and three control groups were sampled from the three schools. The research design employed was quasi-experimental design using pretest-posttest nonequivalent design. A 30-item test captioned as ‘SKbBPCT’ and ‘HESAPBT’ for pretest-posttest respectively were administered on students to generate data for analysis. Data generated was analysed using ANCOVA in SPSS version 25. The study revealed that Bleeded Approach which involved the use of TLA and MLA to teach Home Economics Second Year students biology practicals had positive significant impact on their achievement scores.

Multimedia Laboratory Approach (MLA), Traditional Laboratory Approach (TLA), Opportunity-to-learn (OTL) Practical Content Knowledge (PCK), Practical Pedagogical Knowledge (PPK), Teacher-Student Learning Support (TSLS), Home Economics Students Achievement in Practical Biology Test (HESAPBT), Students Knowledge in basic Biology Practical Concept Test (SKbBPCT)

1. Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. (2011a). ICT use in the teaching of mathematics: Implications for professional development of pre-service teachers in Ghana. Education and Information Technologies, 16(4), 423-439.
2. Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. (2011b). Exploring the potential of the Will Skill Tool model in Ghana: Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology. Computers & Education, 56(1), 91-100.
3. Al-Qahtani, A. A.Y., & Higgins, S. E. (2013). Effects of traditional, blended and e-learning on students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29 (3), 220-234. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00490.x
4. Black, A. (2010). Gen Y: Who they are and how they learn. Educational Horizons, 88, 92–101.
5. Boelens, R., Van Laer, S., De Wever, B., & Elen, J. (2015). Blended learning in adult education: towards a definition of blended learning. Retrieved from http://www.iwt-alo.be/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/01-Project-report-Blended-learning-in-adult-education-towards-a-definition-of-blended-learning.pdf
6. Chism, N., Jones, C., Macce, B., & Mountford, R. (1989). Teaching at the Ohio State University: A handbook. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, Center for teaching Excellence.
7. Clark, J. (2003). Practical activities: What science teaching can learn from primary classrooms? Retrieved from https://www.aare.edu.au/03pap/c/a03570pdf
8. Cockerill, M., Comeau, T., Lee, T. H., & Vinayak, J. (2015). Utilizing Video Multimedia Tools in Biology Labs, Project EL08.
9. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: New York
10. Cunningham, C. M., & Kelly, G.J. (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101(3), 486-505.
11. Dechsri, P., Jones, L. L., & Heikkmen, H. W. (1997). Effect of a laboratory Manual Design Incorporating Visual Information - Processing Aids on students learning and attitude. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34 (9), 891-904.
12. Duran, M., & Ozdemir, O. (2009). A qualitative study on the effect of learners' scientific processing skills on their attitudes towards science (1st International Congress of Educational Research). Canakkale: Canakkale University press.
13. Graham, C. R. (2013). Emerging practice and research in blended learning. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of Distance Education (3rd ed., pp. 33-350). New York, NY: Routledge.
14. Häse, F., Roch, L. M., & Aspuru-Guzik, A. (2019). Next-Generation Experimentation with self-Driving Laboratories. Trends in Chemistry, 1(3), 282-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trechm.2019.02.007.
15. Hinampas, R. T., Murillo, C. R., Tan, D. A., & Layosa, R. U. (2018). Blended Learning Approach: Effect on Students’ Academic Achievement and Practical Skills in Science Laboratories. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 7 (11), 63-69.
16. Huang, S. L. (2006). An assessment of Science Teachers perception of Secondary School Environments in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 28 (1), 25- 44.
17. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Active learning: cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
18. Kareem, A. A. (2018). The use of Multimedia in Teaching Biology and Its Impact on students Learning Outcomes. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 9, 157-165.Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/epess/isue/38900/457937
19. Nurhikmah, H., Tahmir, S., Junda, M., & Bena, B. A. N (2018). Blended Learning Media in Biology classroom. Journal of Physics: conference series, 1028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1028/1/012027
20. Richardson, J.T. E. (2011). Eta squared and partial eta squared as measurements of effect size in educational research. Educational Research Review, 6,135-147
21. Scott, P. H., Veitch, N. J., Gadegaard, H., Mughal, M., Norman, G., & Welsh, M. (2017). Enhancing theoretical understanding of practical biology course using active and self-directed learning strategies. Journal of Biological Education, 52(2), 184-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2017.1293557
22. Singh, H., & Reed, C. (2001). Achieving success with Blended Learning. Central software. ASTD State of the Industry Report. American Society for Training and Development.
23. Supiano, B. (2018). Traditional Teaching May Deepen Inequality. Can a Different Approach Fix it? - The Chronicle of Higher Education Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Traditional-Teaching-May/243339
24. Trowbridge, L. W., Bybee, R. W., & Powell, J. C. (2004). Teaching Secondary School Science: Strategies for Developing Scientific Literacy. (8th ed.). Upper Saddle, New Jersey: Pearson Education, LUC.
25. Ümit, I., & Haran, A. (2012). The Effect of Blended Learning Model on High School Students Biology Achievement and on their Attitudes towards the internet. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(2), 228-237.
26. Umoke, J. C., & Nwafor, C. C (2014). Effect of Instructional Simulation on Secondary School Students’ Achievement in Biology. Journal of Education and Practice, 19 (5), 101-110.
27. White, H., & Sabarwal, S. (2014). Quasi-experimental Design and Methods, Methodological Briefs:Impact Evaluation 8, no.8. Florence: UNICEF Office of Research.
28. Yustina, W., Syatii, R., & Vebrianto, R. (2020). The Effects of Blended Learning and Project-Based Learning on Pre-service Biology Teachers Creative Thinking through Online Learning in the Covid-19 pandemic. Journal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9 (3), 408-420. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i3.24706